Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Still Waters No Longer Running, Derp.

Options
  • 05-07-2011 11:28pm
    #1
    Registered Users Posts: 2,107 ✭✭✭ironingbored


    Sinister alternative to teaching of religion
    Fri, Jul 01, 2011

    Tom Hickey proposed the discontinuance of the practice of educating a child for the life he/she will live, writes JOHN WATERS

    THE MOST disquieting article I have read in this newspaper for some time was published last Friday under the byline of Tom Hickey. It was a relief to note that the author was not the great Irish actor, who once inhabited the personality of Benjy Riordan, but, instead, a fully-accessorised product of our university system, having recently completed a PhD on “republican liberty” at NUI Galway.

    The article was headed “‘Common’ schools best in transmitting civic values”. As with most contributions on education these days, it soon became clear that it was an implicit denunciation of teaching religion to children, although this argument was partly camouflaged by the advocacy of “non-denominational” or “common” schools.

    While not demanding an outright ban on religious involvement in education, Hickey argued that the “legitimacy” of religious denominational schools should depend on their capability to develop “the appropriate skills and attitudes” in their students. By this he appeared to mean that religious schools might be tolerated if they abandoned the teaching of religion. The article identified four headings under which an assessment of the educative legitimacy of schools must be conducted: civic patriotism; understanding and contesting power; the common good, including awareness of interdependence and inequalities; and “reasonable pluralism”, ie, an awareness of different outlooks and beliefs.

    Children educated in “common schools”, Hickey asserted, are more likely to acquire the correct understandings of citizenship under these four headings. To ensure that the prescribed values-systems are correctly transmitted, religious schools must be “restricted in significant ways” by the State.

    Hickey stated rather coherently the view of education now standard-issue within media, the political system and, increasingly, the education system itself. Outwardly, this appears to propose a “neutral” form of education, stripped of the particularities of particular faiths. But it also wilfully misunderstands what education is – the introduction of the child to a total relationship with reality – and what religion is, conflating the essence of religion with its institutional expression and interpreting faith as an add-on interpretation of life and the world, at odds with the “neutral” understandings being proposed.

    Properly understood, religion enables the opening up of the child’s natural understanding of his/her own structure and relationship with the totality of reality. True education involves the proffering of a tradition in its entirety, together with the freedom to interrogate it. Its fundamental objective is not the “inculcation” of anything, still less the indoctrination of values or beliefs. That Irish Catholicism has tended to misunderstand the meaning of the word “freedom” is insufficient reason to replace a stunted form of propaganda with an outrightly sinister one.

    Hickey proposes the discontinuance of the practice of educating a child for the life he or she will live, substituting for this a process of indoctrinating each child in an ideological version of reality in which he or she is to be regarded as just another atom. Among the many ingredients missing from this prescription is the nurturing of the subjectivity of the child in the mysteriousness of reality.

    Reading down Hickey’s argument, it soon became clear that what might casually be read as the “neutral” values he wishes to have conveyed to our children are in fact deeply and specifically ideological. Children, he declared, must be taught about science “independently of religious doctrine”, as though it were obvious that science and religion are in opposition to one another.

    Schools must be open to staff and students from outside their particular faith denominations, who must be accommodated on an equal footing, an insistence that would seem ipso facto to demolish the specificity of any given religious understanding of reality. The most chilling thing about Hickey’s article was the repeated use of the phrase “child citizen”, which must have caused Orwell to turn repeatedly in his grave on account of his failure to think it up when writing 1984.

    It appears that the correct understandings of democracy and citizenship to be “inculcated” into “child citizens” involve not just a capacity to maintain checks on those in the public realm, but also the capability of “critically assessing” their own “inherited religious or non-religious commitments” in what Hickey intriguingly described as “the so-called private sphere”. Advocating caution against “child citizens” remaining “permanently in thrall” to the beliefs of their parents, Hickey expressed no view on the dangers of children remaining “in thrall” to the ideological perspectives to be “inculcated” on behalf of the State.

    Such is the reduced nature of understandings in our culture that these prescriptions may now appear unexceptionable. When we return, however, to the core mission of education – to prepare a child for life, as opposed to for an economy, a civic space, or even a republic – it becomes clear that what is being proposed is the reduction of the experience of being human. The “child citizen” will be primed to live a life in the box built by man, governed by statutes and economics and approved thinking, closed off from most of the vast possibilities of existence, his hope deflated, her desire stunted, a citizen of a dictatorship of pseudo-pluralism, quasi-equality, reduced reason and, ultimately, nothingness.

    © 2011 The Irish Times

    Can anyone help me translate the parts in bold. I'm really struggling. :confused:
    Tagged:


«13456781

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,872 ✭✭✭strobe


    I think I'm going to be sick...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,327 ✭✭✭AhSureTisGrand


    I have analysed John Waters' writing style in the past. All his articles go like this:
    *BIZARRE OPINION THAT MAKES NO SENSE*

    This is why I am right:


    wafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewaffle
    wafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewaffle
    wafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewaffle
    wafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewaffle
    wafflewafflewafflewaffle



    My wafflewaffle has explained everything. My conclusion is perfectly reasonable. Those liberals are eejit devilspawn heathens


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,107 ✭✭✭ironingbored


    Good response to Waters' spurious piffle
    Sir, – Regarding John Waters’s attempt to defend religious control and indoctrination in Irish schools (Opinion, July 1st), first, the “child citizens” in the real republic where I reside do not emerge from their secular schools with their “hope deflated, desire stunted, a citizen of a dictatorship”. On the contrary, they tend to emerge with curious, eager and well trained minds, ready to play an active civic role. Second, it remains absolutely open to parents in France, as it would in Ireland, to inculcate in their children whatever sense they wish of the “mysteriousness of reality”. Why it is felt by some that this task should be delegated to state-trained and paid-for educators is perhaps the real mystery. – Yours, etc,


  • Registered Users Posts: 26,578 ✭✭✭✭Turtwig


    Yet again, I find myself bewildered about what exactly the requirement is to become a journalist.

    Spouting an opinion seems to be all they do these days. Honestly, just look at that trial in the U.S depressing **** the media is.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,141 ✭✭✭eoin5


    I have analysed John Waters' writing style in the past. All his articles go like this:

    I think this is a bit more accurate:
    *BIZARRE OPINION THAT MAKES NO SENSE*

    This is why I am right:


    wafflewaffle"waffle"wafflewafflewafflewafflewaffle"wafflewaffle"wafflewafflewaffle
    wafflewafflewaffle"waffle"wafflewafflewafflewaffle"waffle"waffle"wafflewaffle"waffle
    wafflewaffle"waffle"wafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewafflewaffle
    waffle"waffle"wafflewaffle"wafflewaffle"wafflewafflewafflewafflewaffle"waffle"waffle
    wafflewaffle"wafflewaffle"


    My wafflewaffle has explained everything. My conclusion is perfectly reasonable. Those liberals are eejit devilspawn heathens


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 27,857 ✭✭✭✭Dave!


    I hate John Waters very muchly.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    Oh wow, you actually bothered to read John Water's nonsense.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 46,938 ✭✭✭✭Nodin


    Dave! wrote: »
    I hate John Waters very muchly.

    Your understanding of your own structure obviously hasn't been opened.


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 24,413 Mod ✭✭✭✭robindch


    I find it embarrassing that adults can read this kind of tendentious nonsense and and convince themselves he's actually representing the other side accurately and fairly.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 49,276 CMod ✭✭✭✭magicbastarder


    i am crying, reading this.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 606 ✭✭✭bastados


    If you cant say something in a straight forward manner then I would think you dont fully grasp what it is your trying to saying...though I would say Waters likes to meander...he's a paid faffer after all.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,150 ✭✭✭✭Malari


    I heard him on Hook on Newstalk on Friday evening. He makes me sick! No-one on to correct him that the absence of religion in schools is not the same as being shouted at through the intercom that "THERE IS NO GOD" every hour.

    He refused to even listen to texts that were sent into the show because they were "anonymous".


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 2,196 ✭✭✭the culture of deference


    We have fools like waters spouting this nonsensical garbage, we have a church collapsing under the weight of the scandals, what does it say about the majority of people in ireland when this is acceptable. Why is anyone surprised.


  • Registered Users Posts: 510 ✭✭✭feelpablo


    Properly understood, religion enables the opening up of the child’s natural understanding of his/her own structure and relationship with the totality of reality.

    Among the many ingredients missing from this prescription is the nurturing of the subjectivity of the child in the mysteriousness of reality.

    When is his great work of fiction going to be published :rolleyes:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 27,857 ✭✭✭✭Dave!


    robindch wrote: »
    I find it embarrassing that adults can read this kind of tendentious nonsense and and convince themselves he's actually representing the other side accurately and fairly.
    Indeed... I didn't read the original article, but there was a letter yesterday with absolutely no substance, which contributed nothing, but just fapped for 300 words or so about how awesome and deadly John Waters is for writing the article.

    Insane.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,809 ✭✭✭CerebralCortex


    Dave! wrote: »
    Indeed... I didn't read the original article, but there was a letter yesterday with absolutely no substance, which contributed nothing, but just fapped for 300 words or so about how awesome and deadly John Waters is for writing the article.

    Insane.

    Link?


  • Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 25,558 Mod ✭✭✭✭Dades


    I ain't reading that crap - but did anyone hear him on 1st July on George Hook's Newstalk show (Part 3)? The panel only had Hooky (who interestingly seems to be a sideline agnostic) and their US movie guy who is a Christian.

    Waters was nothing short of disgraceful calling some reasonable non-religious texter - who was a teacher in a catholic school - a bigot and that they should be fired for the views they held.

    Him and the US guy both referred to Stalin, Mao etc, sending me into spasms of fury (I'd had a stressful day). I sent a long text in but it never got read out.

    The show was a one-sided debacle.


  • Registered Users Posts: 18,150 ✭✭✭✭Malari


    Dades wrote: »
    I ain't reading that crap - but did anyone hear him on 1st July on George Hook's Newstalk show (Part 3)? The panel only had Hooky (who interestingly seems to be a sideline agnostic) and their US movie guy who is a Christian.

    Waters was nothing short of disgraceful calling some reasonable non-religious texter - who was a teacher in a catholic school - a bigot and that they should be fired for the views they held.

    Him and the US guy both referred to Stalin, Mao etc, sending me into spasms of fury (I'd had a stressful day). I sent a long text in but it never got read out.

    The show was a one-sided debacle.

    Yeah, I mentioned it about 5 posts up! I was raging too, he was just plain wrong in his views about what secularism is and he was allowed waffle on.

    The trick to getting George to read a text seems to adding "bet you won't read this out!"


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,815 ✭✭✭Burgo


    Dades wrote: »
    I ain't reading that crap - but did anyone hear him on 1st July on George Hook's Newstalk show (Part 3)? The panel only had Hooky (who interestingly seems to be a sideline agnostic) and their US movie guy who is a Christian.

    Waters was nothing short of disgraceful calling some reasonable non-religious texter - who was a teacher in a catholic school - a bigot and that they should be fired for the views they held.

    Him and the US guy both referred to Stalin, Mao etc, sending me into spasms of fury (I'd had a stressful day). I sent a long text in but it never got read out.

    The show was a one-sided debacle.

    That was so very painful to listen to. And thanks for the link I was in a good mood before i listened to it :o


  • Moderators Posts: 51,759 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    from Wa(lly)ters on Newstalk: "Education is not education without religion" :rolleyes:

    questioning beliefs is "an imposition on the religious parents":rolleyes:

    And there's nonsense about how the imagination, curiousity (almost their humanity) is stripped away if kids don't have religion in schools:rolleyes:

    I'm beginning to think he's currently posting in the education thread :pac:

    EDIT: bingo,in the podcast it is said that "atheism is based on a hatred of religion" :rolleyes:

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,030 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    I think he's trying to say that moves to remove the religious influence (or at least it's essence - which he doesn't describe) in schools will leave children as nihilist husks with no feeling of purpose.

    On top of this I believe that he's trying to say that this goal has 'sinister' undertones. My personal intrepretation is that he is suggesting that 'the state' wants children all to itself so that they might be indoctrinated as unquestioning 'statists'.

    If he did mean this then why didn't he just say it that way?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,780 ✭✭✭liamw


    I've emailed him asking for a response to this thread


  • Moderators Posts: 51,759 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    another "gem" from Waters "[atheists] are parasites on the morality of Christianity".

    When responding to criticism regarding him saying that atheists don't offer any morality to society.

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,780 ✭✭✭liamw


    bahaha
    Wikipedia wrote:
    On 26 November 2009, he contacted RTÉ's radio programme, Today with Pat Kenny, during an interview with Jimmy Wales to say that "only crackpots write for Wikipedia"

    "In an interview, he has described people of faith as "funnier, sharper and smarter" than atheists"....

    http://www.countmeout.ie/responses/mp3/CMO_4FM_150709.mp3


  • Registered Users Posts: 30,746 ✭✭✭✭Galvasean


    liamw wrote: »

    "In an interview, he has described people of faith as "funnier, sharper and smarter" than atheists"....

    ORLY?

    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTKWUvJEZOl3CoAcH63dqhPrzpD0VAl3blfiEkR5gC8mTNc1dKg&t=1


    There is something about that Waters lad that creeps me out slightly. He doesn't so much strongly disagree with the concept of atheism, but seems to hate atheists entirely.


  • Registered Users Posts: 25,233 ✭✭✭✭King Mob


    Galvasean wrote: »
    ORLY?

    images?q=tbn:ANd9GcTKWUvJEZOl3CoAcH63dqhPrzpD0VAl3blfiEkR5gC8mTNc1dKg&t=1

    And to add to that:
    orly_george_carlin.jpg


  • Moderators Posts: 51,759 ✭✭✭✭Delirium


    liamw wrote: »
    bahaha



    "In an interview, he has described people of faith as "funnier, sharper and smarter" than atheists"....

    even the guy in the coma? :eek::P

    great point though, "my gang is cooler than your gang.na na nana na!!!" :rolleyes:

    If you can read this, you're too close!



  • Registered Users Posts: 2,107 ✭✭✭ironingbored


    I'd love to get #themysteriousnessofreality trending on Twitter


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,397 ✭✭✭Paparazzo


    How can anyone take the guy seriously? Remember he wrote the eurovision song for Ireland. He was on every radio show going on about what an amazing song it was.
    It finished last. Would have got zero points after every country voted only the last country gave us a few points!

    The guy is a joke of a journalist with a seriously over inflated opinion of himself. He's a poor mans Kevin Myres at trolling.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,397 ✭✭✭Paparazzo


    liamw wrote: »
    bahaha



    "In an interview, he has described people of faith as "funnier, sharper and smarter" than atheists"....

    http://www.countmeout.ie/responses/mp3/CMO_4FM_150709.mp3

    Dane Cook v Dara O'Briain


Advertisement